Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIAPACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA
VS
UBSUBS
PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA

PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA

66 Canterbury Rd, Bayswater North, 3153, AU

Last Update: 18/02/2026

View Profile
751/1000Fair

Operating in Australia for over 40 years, PACCAR Financial is your dedicated financier of Kenworth and DAF trucks. We offer customised financial solutions to the road transport industry.

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:4
Subsidiaries:34
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
UBS

UBS

Postbox, Zurich, CH, 8001

Last Update: 27/07/2026

View Profile
Between 750 and 799
http://www.ubs.com/about
750/1000Fair

From gaining new experiences in different roles to acquiring fresh knowledge and skills – at UBS we believe that you should never stop growing and learning because life never stops teaching. We know that it's our people – with their unique backgrounds, skills, experienc...

NAICS:52
NAICS Definition:Finance and Insurance
Employees:118,265
Subsidiaries:6
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
1
Attack type number
2

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA

PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
UBS

UBS

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Financial Services Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for UBS in 2026.

Incidents

Incident History - PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA (X = Date, Y = Severity)

PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - UBS (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UBS cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA

PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
UBS

UBS

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
UBS604061925
🔒 Incident : Breach
CHA300062125

FAQ

Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA company and UBS company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA company and UBS company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA company and UBS company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA company and UBS company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA company and UBS company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA company and UBS company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA company and UBS company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA company and UBS company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA company and UBS company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA company and UBS company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA company and UBS company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA and UBS, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA and UBS, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA or UBS ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA or UBS ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA and UBS, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between PACCAR FINANCIAL AUSTRALIA and UBS, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-67866
SUMMARY

Buffer Overflow vulnerability in Systerel S2OPC 1.7.3 allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service via the LockedStaMac_ProcessMsg_DeleteMonitoredItemsResponse and SOPC_StaMac_NewDeleteMonitoredItems in the client wrapper DeleteMonitoredItems path

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-67863
SUMMARY

In open62541 1.5.5, a server-side use-after-free exists in the local MonitoredItem callback path. The issue occurs when UA_Subscription_localPublish continues to use the current UA_Notification after a callback invokes UA_Server_deleteMonitoredItem for the current local MonitoredItem. This allows a remote attacker to cause a denial of service.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.5)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.5
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
3.6
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-19026
SUMMARY

H5Z__filter_nbit in H5Znbit.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 dereferences cd_values[0] through cd_values[4] without validating that cd_values is non-NULL or that cd_nelmts is at least 5, the fixed size of the filter's header. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted HDF5 file that stores the N-Bit filter pipeline message with zero client-data values, opened and read via H5Dread, e.g. by the h5ls or h5repack tools.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA
CVE-2026-19025
SUMMARY

H5O__layout_decode in H5Olayout.c in HDF5 through 2.3.0 does not validate that a chunked dataset's stored chunk-layout dimensionality matches its dataspace rank when an existing dataset is opened, whereas this check is performed only at dataset-creation time. This allows attackers to cause a denial of service (divide-by-zero and application crash in H5S__hyper_iter_get_seq_list in src/H5Shyper.c) via a crafted HDF5 file with mismatched chunk/dataspace ranks that is opened and read via H5Dopen2 and H5Dread, e.g. by the h5repack tool.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-08-05
UPDATED
Date2026-08-05
RISK INFORMATION (Score: )
CVSS4
Base Score: 6.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:4.0/AV:L/AC:L/AT:N/PR:N/UI:P/VC:N/VI:N/VA:H/SC:N/SI:N/SA:N/E:X/CR:X/IR:X/AR:X/MAV:X/MAC:X/MAT:X/MPR:X/MUI:X/MVC:X/MVI:X/MVA:X/MSC:X/MSI:X/MSA:X/S:X/AU:X/R:X/V:X/RE:X/U:X
IMPACT SCORE
NA
EXPLOITABILITY
NA